Friday

What is the offseason? Really? When no baseball games are played. For the Red Sox, it keeps starting in early October

What is the offseason? Really? When no baseball games are played. For the Red Sox, it keeps starting in early October.

What's your take on offseason? Hyphen or no? In the last year, Brian and I made the executive decision to eliminate the hyphen. The New York Times disagrees, AP Style doesn't (at least the last time I checked). We hope you approve of our decision.

Meaning? This has been what general manager Ben Cherington has been waiting for since August 25, and likely before. The Red Sox have not entered an offseason with this much financial flexibility since, well, at least 2010! The opportunity exists to alter the course of this organization in a profound fashion, positively or negatively, before Boston plays another baseball game.

How much money is committed to 2013 already? Currently $45.5 million, doled out to John Lackey, Jon Lester, Dustin Pedroia, Clay Buchholz and Jose Iglesias. Of course, the Red Sox have to account for the raises a bunch of eligible players will get in arbitration. In terms of the luxury tax, Boston sits just below the $38.8 million mark. Expect the Red Sox to stay under the $189 million threshold (by a fair margin too in the offseason; the Sox will likely want to give themselves enough room to add a piece or two during the regular season).

Who's eligible for arbitration? A whole slew of players: Jacoby Ellsbury, Craig Breslow, Ryan Sweeney, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Rich Hill, Andrew Bailey, Daniel Bard, Alfredo Aceves, Mike Aviles, Andrew Miller and Franklin Morales.* Beyond that, there are a group of players under team control and yet to reach arbitration, including Felix Doubront and Will Middlebrooks.

*CORRECTION: A previous version of this post listed Junichi Tazawa among those eligible for arbitration. He is not. Apologies.

Will all those arbitration-eligible players be back? Not necessarily. Obviously, Aceves is likely to be moved, either via trade or non-tender. (A non-tender is when you don't tender a contract to a player who is eligible for arbitration.) Given the team's glut of left-hand hitting outfielders, Ryan Sweeney is another candidate to be non-tendered. Aviles has said he does not expect to return after being benched for the final few weeks of the season, although he clearly has value as either the everyday shortstop or as a utility player.

Who are free agents? David Ortiz and Cody Ross are the two biggest names. There are also Daisuke Matsuzaka, James Loney, Aaron Cook, Vicente Padilla and Scott Podsednik.

What's the first domino to fall? That happened earlier this week with Bobby Valentine.

Who is going to be the next manager? I don't know.

Does Brian know? Yes, but he's decided not to tell anyone.

Is John Farrell the favorite? Yes.

Why? His team wasn't any good: True, the Blue Jays went just 73-89 this season (four games better than the Red Sox), and have taken steps back in each of Farrell's two seasons, from 85 wins to 81 to 73 (meaning he's on pace to win only 57 in 2013).

There are a number of reasons the Red Sox like Farrell, though:

1. They're familiar with him, and so are the players. From his time as Boston's pitching coach from 2007 to 2010, Farrell earned the respect of much of the clubhouse, and he's one of the few candidates who wouldn't have to build credibility with the team's core. We saw what an issue that was with Valentine; players were immediately suspicious of his methods, and those fears were confirmed in spring training when he criticized Aviles and in April when he went after Kevin Youkilis.

2. Boston's biggest problem over the last seven months of baseball (so September 2011 through all of 2012) has been its starting pitching. The Red Sox have cycled through three pitching coaches in that time, and seen both Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz take steps back from their best seasons in 2010 -- which came under Farrell. If you'd like to point out that Toronto's team ERA hasn't been so hot under Farrell, you should probably mention that the Blue Jays traded their most reliable starter in Shaun Marcum the offseason before Farrell arrived and that they lost three of their five starters this season in a single week in June. It probably isn't Farrell's fault that the rotation by the end of the season included Aaron Laffey and Carlos Villanueva. (Now, Ricky Romero's perplexing regression is another matter, one that's harder to rationalize for Farrell.)

3. Farrell has a strong background in player development from his time in Cleveland, during which he worked with assistant general manager Mike Hazen. There was a time when Farrell was on more of a general manager track than that of a field manager, and that could be the type of person Boston wants as it enters into a different organizational phase. Ben Cherington emphasized finding a longer-term fit this time around. With the next wave of top prospects expected to show up sometime in 2014, a manager familiar with the growing pains of development could fit.

This is a totally convincing argument. John Farrell has no flaws! That's not true. Questions about Farrell's command of the Toronto clubhouse emerged late in the year, particularly in the aftermath of Yunel Escobar's suspension for writing a slur on his eyeblack. Omar Vizquel was sharp in his critique of the Blue Jays staff, telling the Toronto Sun that the coaches let mistakes slide throughout the year: "I think the coaching staff have a big responsibility to kind of get in there and tie things up a little, have a bit more communication with their players and try to make this thing happen the right way."

There's also the issue of compensation. If the Red Sox want Farrell, they're going to have to give something up for him. This is not true of any other candidates, so they should want Farrell by an appreciable amount to pursue him.

What will compensation look like? Chris Carpenter! (That would be hilarious...and cruel.)

Brian looked into this the other day, using the Ozzie Guillen trade last offseason as a precedent. He mentioned Garin Cecchini and Drake Britton as potential guys going to Toronto. Managerial compensation is still tough to gauge; will it cost less for Farrell since he doesn't have the track record Guillen did, or more because he would be moving within the division?

If not Farrell, then who? Then there's a whole bunch of similarly-résuméd candidates, most of whom are younger with experience on a big-league coaching staff but not as a big-league manager. Think along the lines of Tim Bogar, Tim Wallach, Dave Martinez, Torey Lovullo, Sandy Alomar, Jr., Joey Cora, etc.

Who do you like in that group? At this point, I can't really differentiate between those guys. I'm sorry.

Can Brian? Yes, but he's decided not to tell anyone.

Who is actually going to hire the next manager? Cherington or someone else? The Red Sox went out of their way to affirm that Cherington is leading this search, while maintaining it would be a collaborative process -- just as they said it was last year. Given the way it went last year, it does seem that Cherington would have more leverage in asserting his opinion over that of, oh, I don't know, Larry Lucchino.

Once a manager is in place, umm, then what? Then the Red Sox, if they haven't already, will sit down with David Ortiz and Cody Ross.

Chances Ortiz comes back? Really good, I'd say. We've been saying for a while now that the market for a strict designated hitter has been slim the last few years, and right now, the Red Sox need Ortiz too much to allow him to go elsewhere. If Boston tenders him a $13.3 million contract, that would probably represent fair market value (for a player who did miss the last two-and-a-half months, mind you) and dissuade other teams from getting into the bidding (since they'd have to surrender a draft pick).

The Red Sox could choose to reward Ortiz with a two-year deal, but I don't think they'll have to if they don't want to. A two-year deal would likely save money in the long-term (Ortiz would have signed a two-year, $25 million contract last offseason, and the Sox are now looking at paying him at least that much) with the obvious risk of injury. Given the team's financial freedom, though, it might behoove Boston to go year to year with Ortiz.

Chances Ross comes back? Pretty good, for similar reasons. It's a good fit, and the Red Sox need Ross more than most teams. Boston doesn't have a starting corner outfielder on its roster right now -- apologies to Daniel Nava -- and it needs middle-of-the-order pop. Ross' affection for Fenway Park is well-documented: He hit .298/.356/.565/.921 at home and .232/.294/.390/.684 on the road. (It's a discrepancy big enough to make the case that his batting order position should be different depending on where the game is played.) Thus, he's more valuable to Boston than he is to other teams. Coming to terms on a two-year deal at $7 million to $9 million per year sounds reasonable.

What happens at the other corner outfield spot? In an ideal world, Ryan Kalish would have shown himself ready to take over a corner spot by 2013. It obviously hasn't been an ideal world for Kalish the last two seasons, as he's missed a ton of time with shoulder and neck issues that are still lingering.

The biggest name on the free-agent market, outfielder or not, is Josh Hamilton, and the likelihood of Hamilton returning to Texas seems lower than ever following the team's disappointing conclusion to 2012. That said, signing Hamilton to a big-money deal -- and the low-end guess is it will take at least five years and at least $20 million per season -- undercuts what was achieved in the Nick Punto Trade. Hamilton is also going to be 32 next May, so he's already on the back side of his prime.

If not Hamilton, then who? There are some other options on the free-agent market. Nick Swisher -- also an option for first base -- is probably going to be too expensive. The two most realistic options on the market are both veterans: Torii Hunter and Shane Victorino. Hunter has had a tremendous season in Anaheim, playing outstanding defense in right while hitting .313/.365/.451/.817 (buoyed by an outrageous batting average on balls in play, by the way). He also has a reputation as a fantastic clubhouse guy. He does turn 38 next July.

Victorino, 32 this offseason, had a worse year than Hunter, but he has a stronger track record the last few years. In 2011, he posted a 130 OPS+ and was arguably the most valuable position player on a team that won more than 100 games in Philadelphia. Like Hunter, he'd be a great defender in Fenway's right field. Unlike Hunter, he'd probably require more than a one- or two-year deal.

How about the trade market, i.e. JUSTIN UPTON? Upton's obviously appealing, even if he had a down year in 2012. He's under team control through 2015 at a relatively affordable rate, and he might be easier to get because of that down year. Those are also reasons Arizona doesn't need to trade him and probably shouldn't trade him right now.

What about Ellsbury for Upton? One of the main reasons the Diamondbacks would trade Upton is to clear space in their crowded outfield, where they also have Chris Young, Jason Kubel, Gerardo Parra and Adam Eaton. They wouldn't want an outfielder back, let alone one about to hit a free-agent payday.

It might actually be easier to get one of those other outfielders from Arizona. Young would likely come cheap; he's a solid defender, but his power is mitigated by a ton of strikeouts. Parra, who won a Gold Glove in 2011, would be a fantastic addition, but one that wouldn't come cheap.

Should the Red Sox trade Ellsbury? As we've been saying for a while, that really depends on the market. Yes, the Red Sox should explore trading Ellsbury in a more aggressive fashion than most of their players. Given the kind of season he had and his impending free agency, however, the likelihood of getting anything remotely equal in return is slim. Why would a team trade key assets for a year of Ellsbury when it could just sign Michael Bourn? Or Josh Hamilton? So while I expect there to be rumors about Ellsbury all winter, I'd be surprised if Boston found equal value for him on the market.

Ellsbury for Elvis Andrus? Texas' late-season collapse and the diminishing probability of Hamilton returning, combine to make the Rangers an interesting potential landing spot for Ellsbury. Would a team whose core is aging view 2013 as a significant enough year to part with Andrus (since the Rangers have Jurickson Profar to take his place) and take a chance on Ellsbury in center? The Red Sox would probably have to include something beyond Ellsbury to get it done, and Texas might prefer to hold on to Andrus with the thought of eventually letting Profar play second and moving Ian Kinsler to the outfield. Andrus himself is a free agent after 2014.

What other places might potentially be fits for Ellsbury in 2013? Who else should Cherington call? The Nationals have been looking for a center fielder/leadoff hitter for a few years, and general manager Mike Rizzo has a good working relationship with Scott Boras. They're a natural fit, so long as they don't sign Bourn or reignite trade talks with Minnesota on Denard Span. (P.S. If the Red Sox do trade Ellsbury and don't get a CF in return, they should ignite trade talks with Minnesota on Denard Span.)

The Phillies need a center fielder, and they'll be in on Bourn as well.

Here's a little more outlandish idea: Tampa Bay. The Rays are on the verge of losing B.J. Upton, and they've desperately needed offense for two years. Would they consider taking a one-year risk on Ellsbury as a rental? Tampa Bay would probably need Ellsbury's price to drop to around the value of the sandwich-round pick the Rays would recoup by letting Ellsbury walk after 2013, in which case, well, why would the Sox trade him?

If Andrus isn't the shortstop (sigh), would the Red Sox explore any other external options? Unlikely. The expectation is that Mike Aviles and Jose Iglesias enter camp competing for the everyday job...again.

Any other outfielders worth mentioning? Shin-Soo Choo has one more year of arbitration before hitting the open market. The Indians have said they will be "open-minded" about dealing Choo this offseason. Aside from a down 2011, Choo has been excellent the last five years, with an on-base percentage of at least .373 in four of them. The downsides will be the cost and that he's another left-handed hitter.

How about first base? Swisher and Adam LaRoche are the most tempting names on the market. Both are coming off strong years -- LaRoche hit 33 home runs total, and Swisher seemed to hit that many against Boston alone -- and thus will likely cost more than they're worth. (Brief cases against signing either to a longer-term deal: Swisher turns 32 this offseason, LaRoche 33. Told you it was brief.)

The other options on the free-agent market aren't inspiring. Mike Napoli may kill the Red Sox, but his breakout 2011 looks like the aberration rather than vice versa, and he loses a lot of his value once he takes the catcher's gear off. A team who can play Napoli both behind the plate and at first is likely to give him more than the Sox should. Carlos Peña, Casey Kotchman and James Loney are all guys known for their gloves at the position, and that's good news for bats that OPS'd .684, .612 and .630, respectively. (Loney's hitting .230/.264/.310/.574 in his cameo with the Red Sox didn't exactly constitute a "contract drive.")

So Boston might have to get creative here within the trade market. Brian wrote a while back about the Angels' glut of first basemen, and Kendrys Morales could be worth a gamble. Minnesota might be willing to move Justin Morneau in the last year of his deal. The Tigers could trade a healed Victor Martinez. The Phillies have discussed moving Chase Utley to third to help save his legs; moving to first (with the Red Sox ) would probably help his legs more. Utley has a year left on his contract, and Philadelphia should be looking to dump some of its financial obligations ("should be" does not mean "will be").

So you've got no idea who's playing first? I am as confused as Costello. Or was it Abbott?

It was Sebastian Dinwiddie, played by Costello: That thing really is comic genius:

In an overarching sense, what will likely be different about Boston's position players next year as opposed to the last few? I don't see a way where they have a lineup on par with what they've had over the last decade. On Opening Day 2012, Cody Ross hit seventh. He's probably the frontrunner to hit cleanup on Opening Day 2013. The middle of the order -- right now, if I had to bet, I'd say it will be Ortiz-Ross-Will Middlebrooks -- just won't be as good as the days of Ortiz-Ramirez-Lowell.

Furthermore, the lineup as a whole appears as if it won't work the count as well as past Red Sox teams. Aviles and Saltalamacchia had on-base percentages below .300. Middlebrooks, as good as his rookie season was, had five strikeouts for every walk. Even Ross only OBP'd .326.

Therefore, the pitching had better be good, right? Yes, the pitching had better be good.

How does the pitching get better? The good news is that the easiest place to find value this offseason will be in the starting pitching market. Last offseason, the Red Sox didn't have the financial wherewithal to pursue pitchers such as Hiroki Kuroda, Edwin Jackson and Roy Oswalt as aggressively as some other teams, and consequently Aaron Cook and Daisuke Matsuzaka were starting games in September. This year, Boston has the money to sign those types of pitchers. Kuroda and Jackson will be available again this winter -- the former likelier to be looking for another short-term deal than the latter. Shaun Marcum is a free agent coming off an injury-plagued year, but he's shown he can compete in the AL East from his time in Toronto. Pitchers such as Dan Haren, Jake Peavy and Gavin Floyd are all likely to have their options turned down.

And then there's Cliff Lee, who might be available at a reduced rate if the Phillies think they need to cut salary. Emphasis on the might.

How many starting pitchers will the Red Sox acquire? Will they go into the season with Felix Doubront and John Lackey as their fourth and fifth starters? Unless Lackey suffers a setback this offseason in his recovery from Tommy John, the Red Sox are probably only going to add one big-time pitcher from those listed above. It would behoove them to add some depth, though; beyond Franklin Morales, I don't know that there's a major-league ready starter not already slotted into the rotation. Cherington admitted he did not do enough last offseason to bolster the rotation.

What about the bullpen? Honestly, I don't know how best to construct a bullpen, aside from signing a whole bunch of guys and hoping it works out. Boston appears to be set up well in the 'pen: A healthy Andrew Bailey (knock on wood, as always, on that front) should still be the closer, Junichi Tazawa has the stuff of a premier set-up man, and Morales, Andrew Miller, Craig Breslow, Mark Melancon and maybe re-signed Scott Atchison and Rich Hill create a pretty good bridge (with Clayton Mortensen, Chris Carpenter and Alex Wilson all waiting in the wings, along with Daniel Bard). In fact, the Red Sox could probably look to deal a bullpen arm; if Cherington learned anything from last offseason, it's that you should trade bullpen pieces instead of trading for them.

Right now, though, the bullpen should be a strength.

How about we stop equivocating and actually make some predictions? But that will leave me open to second guesses and being wrong! Can't I just bet that all the horses will have a fun time?

OK, the Red Sox will re-sign Ortiz (one year) and Ross (two years, $18 million). They'll trade Aceves for a low minor-league prospect and non-tender Sweeney. Their big pitching splash will be signing Haren to a one-year deal for about $13 million with incentives to make more. They'll add at least one depth option, perhaps Brandon McCarthy (I have no idea what the market for him will be like) or Francisco Liriano or someone lower down the list such as Scott Feldman. They'll strike out on trying to sign Hunter and Victorino, who each get bigger deals than expected, and instead trade little for Arizona's Chris Young, whom they spin as Cody Ross Lite (all 14 of Young's homers this past season went to left or left-center). The bigger trade is the one that nets them Morales from Anaheim, with a bullpen arm and a borderline top-10 prospect going the other way. They won't find the value they want for Ellsbury, and thus will have an Opening Day nine that looks as follows: Ellsbury, Pedroia, Ortiz, Morales, Ross, Middlebrooks, Saltalamacchia/Lavarnway, Young, Aviles/Iglesias. The rotation can be Lester, Haren, Buchholz, Doubront and Lackey.

This is so uninspiring: It's somewhat conservative, but I think that's the track Ben Cherington should and most likely will take. Just because the Red Sox have money to spend doesn't mean it's a good idea to spend it all (like Bart and Milhouse on a squishy bender). A free-agent class that's lacking -- and a lot of TV money coming into the game to help prompt some spending (especially since teams can't invest as much in the draft under the new collective bargaining agreement) -- creates an environment where wasteful spending is easy. Boston is re-emphasizing not just identifying and acquiring the players it wants, but acquiring them at the right price -- and being able to walk away when the money gets too much. The Red Sox are not a player or two away, and even if they were, that player isn't available on this free-agent market. They're unlikely to "win the offseason," but we've seen of late how rarely that correlates to winning in the regular season.

Rationalizations! All of them! Yeah, whatever. Congrats for making it this far.

And a closing quote: "But what are smart people for, if not to untangle tangled things?" --The Master and Margarita, Mikhail Bulgakov

Twitter: @TBritton_Projo

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.